My local council are a bunch of idiots.

fraoch

I had a joint tenancy thinking it was OK at the joint tenant was a friends son. He disappeared owing rent and council tax which I have to pay. I told the Council that I knew where he was now but an advisor told me that because I still lived in the house and he was in Scotland the council would take the easy option and ask me to pay

A lot of lessons learnt,

taxi97w

Poppy9 wrote: »

I would know if it hadn't gone just as I would know if any of my other DD for over £100 were missing.

I detest direct debits.

I know the idea of dd is not having to worry about bills not being paid, but I believe they are more trouble than they are worth- just look at the reclaiming bank charges fiasco. I only have one dd and that is for the tv license (only because it won't alter much over time).

I do believe you should check your statements each month, but I am most concerned about mysterious amounts going out, rather than amounts that should obviously go out!

Poppy9

taxi97w wrote: »

I detest direct debits.

I know the idea of dd is not having to worry about bills not being paid, but I believe they are more trouble than they are worth- just look at the reclaiming bank charges fiasco. I only have one dd and that is for the tv license (only because it won't alter much over time).

I do believe you should check your statements each month, but I am most concerned about mysterious amounts going out, rather than amounts that should obviously go out!

I too used to dislike DD as I don't trust anyone, especially with my money:rolleyes: . However since the introduction of on-line banking I feel more confident with them. At the click of a button I can cancel the DD so no further payments can go out - especially useful for things that I change yearly like insurances. I have even had to request a DD back from a BS under the DD guarantee. One phonecall to the Halifax, a form emailed to me and the money was back in my account within 24 hours.

wurlitzerwilly

adouglasmhor wrote: »

Offer them the outstanding ammount straight away and then offer to complete the payment schedule, if as you say they have made an !!!! of it before and it is documented and you offer them a compromise solution, explaining you have not got the money to pay it all at once, and be nice about it (catch more flies with honey than vinegar etc.), you may find you can sort this all out without court and hassle etc.


And if you live off charitable donations how can you claim loss of earnings if you do go to court?

Being a bloody minded old git, I don't want a compromise to be made. I want the status quo restored. i.e. The Council take agreed payments up to this month by the agreed Direct Debit, of their own volition and continue to take regular payments. If they don't want to do this (which after all was at their request) then they may make an appointment to visit and collect the cash.
Frankly, I don't give a stuff about so-called concessions. I don't believe it's anyones right to demand payment for goods not received, up to a year in advance. Cash flow? Tough sh*t. Businesses manage it and survive, so should Councils. As there has been a written agreement between myself/my wife and the Council and it is the Council who have not kept their side of the bargain, I believe they may well have a case to answer in Contractual Law. Councils are not above the Law, despite their arrogant attitude to the contrary.

I may be heading for grief of my own making, but I believe in the principle of us all being able to lead our lives in any way that we wish, subject of course to certain common sense rules. I really do not see why I have to waste any part of my life talking to ANY Council official, especially about their own incompetence. I don't believe that I have to request my wife to check her bank account on a regular basis, just to spy on the Council to see if it's carrying out its agreed obligations. Suppose I was of such a disposition that I accused my wife of not having allowed payment (there are people who would do that - probably Council employees ) and the ensuing row led to a breakdown of our marriage through mistrust. Would the Council do anything to help us?

My apologies, I should have said loss of income, not loss of earnings, but I did not expect to have to go into details of my financial/living arrangements so that others would not jump to conclusions. Still, here's another example: Treat my "income" like the sort of allowance a sibling might be granted by their parents, or perhaps money left from a Will or kept in Trust. It's charitable, discretionary, and may have conditions attached to it which may include the perpetration of certain duties to qualify. It's not taxable even though known of, and may be withdrawn temporarily or permanently, should any agreement be broken. For argument's sake look at a rather extreme case where an agreement is made by the recipient never to leave their premises, on penalty of having their income withdrawn. No work is done for that money so it is not actually earned, but a contract has been made to keep to an agreement. If the recipient goes to Court, they have to leave the premises and may lose their income. If the Court appearance is not through their wrong-doing, they can expect compensation, just as a person on compulsory Jury Service would get.

I think it's very well thought through. :rolleyes:

Regards,

Alan.

Cerro

That's a fair point Voyager - although I wouldn't agree that the councils should be looking after all of those (but that is another subject).

I would however argue about the pay given to council workers. I was offered a job for my local counsils IT department and the contract was one of the best. A pension that no private sector company could match, more holidays than i've ever seen and the possibility for more (for weekend work etc) and time and a half for overtime. In most IT jobs you don't even get overtime pay, nevermind time and a half. The salary offer was on par with most other jobs, not the greatest but still competative. In the end I didn't take it because there was a better offer working with offshore companies - the only other "better" offer I could imagine would be working for a bank in London.

But claiming that mimimum wage means minimum effort, is no excuse for a poor service - if you want more, work for it, its not exactly a dead end job is it? And if it is the lack of training that causes this problem, then that is hardly the OP's fault. I would expect to pay back the money but I would also expect it to be done in a fair and reasonable way, along with an apology for all the mistakes... to lay the blame on the OP because he did not act as a safety net for their own shortcomings is bit cheeky if you ask me.

adouglasmhor

wurlitzerwilly wrote: »

Being a bloody minded old git, I don't want a compromise to be made. I want the status quo restored. i.e. The Council take agreed payments up to this month by the agreed Direct Debit, of their own volition and continue to take regular payments. If they don't want to do this (which after all was at their request) then they may make an appointment to visit and collect the cash.
Frankly, I don't give a stuff about so-called concessions. I don't believe it's anyones right to demand payment for goods not received, up to a year in advance. Cash flow? Tough sh*t. Businesses manage it and survive, so should Councils. As there has been a written agreement between myself/my wife and the Council and it is the Council who have not kept their side of the bargain, I believe they may well have a case to answer in Contractual Law. Councils are not above the Law, despite their arrogant attitude to the contrary.

I may be heading for grief of my own making, but I believe in the principle of us all being able to lead our lives in any way that we wish, subject of course to certain common sense rules. I really do not see why I have to waste any part of my life talking to ANY Council official, especially about their own incompetence. I don't believe that I have to request my wife to check her bank account on a regular basis, just to spy on the Council to see if it's carrying out its agreed obligations. Suppose I was of such a disposition that I accused my wife of not having allowed payment (there are people who would do that - probably Council employees ) and the ensuing row led to a breakdown of our marriage through mistrust. Would the Council do anything to help us?

My apologies, I should have said loss of income, not loss of earnings, but I did not expect to have to go into details of my financial/living arrangements so that others would not jump to conclusions. Still, here's another example: Treat my "income" like the sort of allowance a sibling might be granted by their parents, or perhaps money left from a Will or kept in Trust. It's charitable, discretionary, and may have conditions attached to it which may include the perpetration of certain duties to qualify. It's not taxable even though known of, and may be withdrawn temporarily or permanently, should any agreement be broken. For argument's sake look at a rather extreme case where an agreement is made by the recipient never to leave their premises, on penalty of having their income withdrawn. No work is done for that money so it is not actually earned, but a contract has been made to keep to an agreement. If the recipient goes to Court, they have to leave the premises and may lose their income. If the Court appearance is not through their wrong-doing, they can expect compensation, just as a person on compulsory Jury Service would get.

I think it's very well thought through. :rolleyes:

Regards,

Alan.

Well all that's going to happen is you are going to be told to pay up, with the 10% penalty charge added on plus you will be getting no compensation for anything. The council tax also pays for a stack of lawyers, Indeed some councils insist on their Director of Admin and Chief Executive being qualified lawyers, they will have heard it all before and you have not payed your council tax. You will gain nothing and lose time and effort, Have Fun

wurlitzerwilly

Voyager2002 wrote: »

.................If you want your council tax collection to be of a five-star standard, then you have to pay five-star prices for it, and few people want that.................

Oh purleeees. Five star standard? There is a BASIC standard already in place for the collection of monies by Direct Debit. I simply want that upheld wihout having to endure seeing the face of the faceless.
Pay peanuts, get monkeys. I'll go along with that, but then I don't believe they're paying peanuts, so perhaps the appropriate employees are merely in the wrong department and should be given a less responsible daily task. There are plenty to choose from.
If a person has any care for their vocation and claims that others do the same job from a sense of social responsibility rather than for the benefits that they receive, I really would expect them to have the same responsibility to actually "get it right" - even second time!

Regards,

Alan.

wurlitzerwilly

adouglasmhor wrote: »

Well all that's going to happen is you are going to be told to pay up, with the 10% penalty charge added...................

Hmm. That's also an interesting point. Why 10%. Up to that point, does it really cost the Council 10% of over £1000 to recover some money? Methinks a note to Martin Lewis along similar lines to unfair bank charges is in order.

Regards,

Alan.

wurlitzerwilly

uktim29 wrote: »

..............I see the hobbies of people here tend to be wingeing, going to the papers..............

Guilty!

uktim29 wrote: »

Then causing as much fuss that they can rather than simply pointing out to someone concerned and moving on. This is what 99% of the country manage to do. Hardly being a yes-man is it?

Yes it is being a "yes man". Just the same as it's being a "yes man" by not complaining to a government who would let people (loose term) freely roam around our country, whilst knowing it's their vowed intent to blow our b*ll*cks off!

uktim29 wrote: »

...............Imagine if we sued the council for everything that niggled us.................

I think you miss the point. This is not everything that niggles us, or I'd spend my entire days and nights suing councils. This is a specific case of incompetence, and failure to maintain a laid down procedure.

Regards,

Alan.

adouglasmhor

wurlitzerwilly wrote: »

Hmm. That's also an interesting point. Why 10%. Up to that point, does it really cost the Council 10% of over £1000 to recover some money? Methinks a note to Martin Lewis along similar lines to unfair bank charges is in order.

Regards,

Alan.

I think that is what they were told the maximum they could charge for it was when it changed from the poll tax, so of course they all charge the maximum allowed.